I’m saying? No, I am not personally in charge of the social construction of race in the United States.
Nope, but you use it like it’s your own.
Call him a ‘raghead’ and your journey towards the ‘dark’ side will be complete!
Funny thing - absolutely everyone I have ever encountered in my life has classified me as “White”.
Until they find out I’m Jewish. While most continue to classify me as “White”, there is a subset of those folks who will then vehemently insist that I am NOT White. And that, somehow, they knew all along I was Jewish. 
Also, in general, these are not people who regard being Jewish as a good thing, or in the same category as “White Christian” and thus lesser.
YMMV.
Certainly, initial 911 calls identified the shooter as White. Police radio identified him as White. While being led away to a stretcher he looked White to the media.
It wasn’t until his name was learned that suddenly he’s not White, and I’m sure there will be some who claimed they “knew all along”.
Race and ethnicity are complicated. At least for some of us. For other people, one fact makes the determination and all other facts can be ignored.
I would call him middle eastern, not Arab.
Every case is different, every case is unique. Here we have a murderer who:
-Presents as White
-Has a name that presents as Arabic
-Has a violent history
-May have a history of being the target of racist abuse
-Is almost certainly afflicted with mental illness
-Lives in a state with easy access to firearms
Attempts to simplify this, by saying, “HA HA HE’S ARABIC YOU WOKE MORONS” or by saying “HE’S STILL WHITE YOU RACISTS” aren’t real smart.
Way I see it, there are two reasonable approaches
- Be willing to examine the intricacies of each case to see what we can learn; or
- Eliminate one of the factors common to all mass shootings.
QFT! 
Calling this shooter white is racial erasure. Or do we determine who is “white” based only on skin color? No, we take into account the actual racial and cultural identities and experiences instead.
It’s Schrodinger’s mass shooting as usual - the shooter’s race explains everything and needs to be put in the category of “another [member of racial category X] perpetrates another mass shooting” accompanied by all sorts of theorizing about racial pathology, until we find out the shooter’s race isn’t what we wanted it to be, at which point even mentioning what that race is becomes the equivalent of yelling slurs at people.
I can’t imagine why people think this ideology is intellectually bankrupt.
If you’re saying this unironically about your own ideology, this seems blatantly obvious.
Politicizing these shootings based on what we perceive to be the shooter’s race, ethnicity or whatever seems beyond pointless to me.
If their motivations can be linked to one political strain or another, that’s somewhat relevant.
But if it turns out they’re just armed whackjobs who flipped out, the only relevant political question to ask is How is it still so easy for such whackjobs to get firearms, and what if anything can we do about it?
What is QFT? Looked it up~pretty sure you didn’t mean Quantum Field Theory. No other definition offered. Sometimes a few too many acronyms get thrown around on da Dope and this is one of them.
Also - why do we seem to have so many whackjobs?
Quoted for truth
I’ll admit I was upset when I learned the shooter’s name identified him as likely to be Muslim – not because it conflicted with some pre-existing political narrative of mine, but because it could confirm others’ pre-existing political narrative that Muslims are more likely to be terrorists and lead to further discrimination or violence against Muslims.
When the shooters are identified as White, OTOH, I never fear that the news will lead to further discrimination or violence against Whites.
Thank you! Useful one. Now to go to work convincing my aged brain to remember it. Appreciate your help.
Another mass shooting by a male! Its almost always men. We gotta do something about this…Actually not being that sarcastic.
Why do you use the word “despite” here? The shooter’s identity reinforces the point.
As does your posts.
The shooter being nonwhite “reinforces the point” about white male shooters. Of course it does, when your ideology is indistinguishable from the babbling of a mental patient.
Tell that to your own courts, mate.
So you do think the shooter is nonwhite. But when I ask you to clarify what race you think the shooter is, you’re all,
This is 100% the tactic of an intellectual lightweight who’s too cowardly to admit he’s trying to punch above his weight.
Instead, you could admit that race is real complicated in a case like this. But that would interfere with your plan to “just double down and keep on going with the” woke idiot “theory of this shooting” that you’re so tied to.